Hi Robert,
On 11/03/2009, at 6:17 PM, Robert Kisteleki wrote:
Terry Manderson wrote:
[...]
Additionally, the structure proposed implies to me that the ERX
block would go back to the originated RIR if relinquished (handed
back) by the holder. I'm not clear that this is the case. Last time
I traversed the policy on this I thought the resource remained with
the _current_ RIR for reallocation. (but could be wrong - I
couldn't find anything in the ERX faqs @ the RIR websites to
confirm/deny)
AFAIK there is no policy for this yet. There may be one soon.
In which case I would be inclined to treat ERX no differently to other
resources. Allowing the RTA to grow and shrink as necessary for ERX or
other transfers which makes for less complexity and confusion in the
structure - and that I think should pursued. It would then allow all
permutations of policy to work without incorrectly asserting what the
politics should be.
eg
RIR 1 retains allocation
RIR 1 returns allocation to RIR 2
RIR 2 hands allocation back to the IANA
.. and several others.
Terry
_______________________________________________
sidr mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sidr
